hurricanesfandomcom-20200216-history
Forum:2008 Atlantic hurricane season
December (Officialy) over at last Well, can't say this was a boring season. (Of course, if tradition hold, there's one more storm in stock for us). I want to congratulate SkyFury for an amazingly close call on August 9: "I say 16 storms, 8 hurricanes, 4 major ones, no subtropical or Cat 5s, 4-5 US landfalls, 2-3 landfalling US hurricanes but more hurricane landfalls elsewhere and 1-2 retired names." Considering the final tally is 16-8-5(4 of them category 4), no subtropical, no category 5, 5 US Landfalls, 3 (Con)US Hurricane strength landfalls, this is extremely close. Technically the "More landfalls elsewhere" part is wrong (US got three, as much as Cuba and more than Haiti), but in practice Cuba made it out worse on landfalls (3, all at C-4), and Haiti despite not getting that many H-strength landfall had it the worse this season. Only the retirement part appears to have been off; one is ridiculously unlikely at this point, and the tally is more likely, IMO, to run toward 5 than 2 (Gustav and Ike are goners. Hanna and Paloma aren't looking good for survival either. Fay, Dolly and Omar (and Kyle if Canada gets silly) all have their shots as well. And of course, it's still possible that we'll see limited retirements anyway. --Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 22:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC) Program for use in tropical cyclone QPF ..but weather weenies might like it too. heheheh It's a series of scripts that are run in-house through a GUI named cliqr (http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/tropical/rain/web/cliqr.html), and it runs for all ATCF-entered invests. It shows the rainfall graphics for the systems that most closely match ongoing invests, with greater weight placed on location, size (ROCI), and forward motion than the other parameters. If nothing else, you can look at the list of matches and see where they went. Thegreatdr 23:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC) :Ooh, grown-up toys, yay! -- [[User:SkyFury|''Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 05:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC) Retirements at a glance So, now with six named storms, it seems linke we can discuss retirements now. Here is my take so far: *Arthur - 10% - damage not severe *Bertha - 7% - minimal damage *Cristobal - 5% - foregettable, hardly caused any damage *Dolly - 60% - caused over $1 billion in damage, and 21 deaths *Eduoard - 10% - damage total unknown, but probably not severe *Fay - 75% - caused over 100 deaths, severe damage possible. Interestingly, this could be the first time the same letter in the same list is retired twice, as Fay replaced Fran for the 2002 season. What are your thoughts? 00:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC) :I'm having a hard time corroborating the 100+ deaths from Fay. Most of the sources I'm finding are suggesting 14, and that the original count from Haiti was greatly exaggerated. I'd wait till damage figures are in, but right now I'd put Fay at more like 25% based on what I know right now. I think I'd also nudge Dolly down to 50%, as the death toll/damage estimates are not ''exceptionally high and the affected countries (US and Mexico) seem to be somewhat conservative with nominating names for retirement. Albireo 15:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC) ::By the way, Fay did not replace Fran in the 2002 season, it replaced it in the 1996 season, so this wouldn't be the first time. Here are my estimates: ::Arthur: 4% - It wasn't that bad, and storms cause mudslides all the time in Central America. ::Bertha: 3% - Although it broke a few records, damage in Bermuda wasn't severe. ::Cristobal: 2% - Damage minimal, although this is the only storm so far to follow the Gulf Stream, and it caused some flooding in Nova Scotia, but not much. ::Dolly: 49% - I'm not going to place any bets on this storm, as damage wasn't really that bad, and most flooding occured inland while it was a depression. However, it is still a devastating storm, which caused over 1 billion in damage, so it has a good chance nevertheless. ::Edouard: 6% - Although hurricane watches were originally issued, it never became a hurricane and was really not that bad. ::Fay: 29% 43% - Damages in the US and Cuba were minimal, storms kill dozens in Haiti all the time and not get retired, the bus crash in the Dominican Republic was indirect, but each country does have some chance of retiring it, and it's not done yet. Update: severe flooding in Florida and other places. ::Gustav: (tenative) 78% 77% 80% - Based on the current forecast, but still too early to tell. Update: over 60 deaths in Haiti, massive evacuation initiated in Louisiana.2007Astro'sHurricane 00:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC) ::Hanna: (tenative) 52% 70% 81% - It hasn't done anything yet, but I dunno, I just have a bad feeling about this one... Update: Nearly 140 540 deaths in Haiti. ::Ike: (tenative) 80% 94% - I know it hasn't done anything yet, but it could seriously wreck parts of Florida and the Gulf. Update: Massive devastation in Texas.2007Astro'sHurricane 00:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC) ::Josephine: (tenative) 21% 6% 1% - It's way too early to tell, and it looks like a dud, but there is a chance it may affect Bermuda and Atlantic Canada. Update: Dissapated, but remnants are still existing. Update: Only some breezes in Cape Verde to speak of. ::Kyle: 10% - Wasn't that bad, although its precursor system did impact Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic, and it hit Canada as a hurricane. ::Laura: 1% - Aside from some heavy snow and wind in Great Britain, nothing. ::Marco: 2% - Record-breaker, but it was too small to do much damage. ::Nana: 0% - Uhh, no. ::Omar: 39% - It passed through the Virgin islands quite strongly as a cat. 4 (?), but few areas experienced hurricane-force winds, although there was some damage. ::Paloma: 50% - Oh my, this storm was quite damaging for the Caymans and Cuba, but there was only one fatatity. Dolly was worse, but seeing that the Caribbean islands are more likely to request retirement over smaller damage sums, this seems possible. 2007Astro'sHurricane 00:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC) 2007Astro'sHurricane 17:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC) ::So, there you have it. 2007Astro'sHurricane 22:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC) ::Updated. 2007Astro'sHurricane 23:53, 2 November 2008 (UTC) Just a comment on the question of whether a name with the same letter has been retired from the same list more than once... it's happened multiple times already. Allen > Andrew (x2) > Alex. Alicia > Allison (x3) > Andrea. Frederic > Fabian (x4) > Fred (upcoming). And most strikingly the back-to-back Marilyn > Michelle > Melissa. --Patteroast 07:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC) :When was the last time a tropical storm was retired? One and only Allison? Seems Fay has way to go to reach that. However, if the track swifts a bit more to the south Big Easy might get in troubles. -- 21:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC) You took my title. *Arthur: 5%. 9 deaths total and a fair bit of damage. Neither of these are really substantial criterion for retiring a storm. *Bertha: 2%. It was a certainly notable tropical cyclone, but that's all it has to its name is notability. It only caused three deaths, and none of these were in Bermuda. *Cristobal: 1%. Honestly. The thing did negligibly little. If Chantal wasn't retired last year (and it wasn't), Cristobal stands no chance at all. *Dolly: 45%. This goes off estimated damages being equal to or less than final. If the estimates are greater than actual, it's just a 25%. Fair death toll. *Edouard: 1%. Ladies and gentlemen...what on Earth did this thing do? *Fay: 10%, possibly higher. Fair death toll. Will wait for damage reports. *Gustav: 88%. Made a mess of the Caribbean. High death toll and damages. *Hanna: 85%. What on EARTH happened here?!? This thing ALONE killed more people than ALL OF 2007!!! I hate to do this, but it's got lower chances than Gustav for the sadly unavoidable reason that it's Haiti. But still, axe it. *Ike: ?? *Josephine: 0%. Negligible. Jake52 01:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC) :*Arthur: 3%: Nothing out of the ordinary, your bog standard storm hitting a Central America coast. :*Bertha: 12%: Broke a record or two, scared Bermuda. Not much damage though :*Cristobal: 2%: What did it do again? :*Dolly: 34%: Whacked south Texas. :*Edouard: 10%: Made Houston sit up and take note. Didn't do much in the end though. :*Fay: 39% 59%: Pounded Florida with severe flooding in places. Damage in Carribean was nothing unusual. New Orleans a little lucky not to get a stronger hit due to it staying over the Florida Panhandle. :*Gustav: 62%: Gave New Orleans a scare, but caused flooding to the West. Damage in Haiti :*Hanna: 46%: Damage in Haiti & Bahamas, worsened by... :*Ike: 100%: Prob retired in the Carribean anyway, looks like it's going to be very bad on US Landfall. Death toll set to be higher than Katrina? :*Josephine: 0%: It existed. Not much more I can say about it. - Salak 04:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC), UPDATED: 01:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC) ::Eric's divine and always superior pontification: ::*Arthur: 10% - just for catching NHC with its pants around its ankles...and setting a really cool record too. ::*Bertha: 9% - I've always wanted to visit Bermuda, apparently Bertha felt the same way. She had a jolly old time out there for about a month. What is it about Berthas that make them so hard to kill? ::*Cristobal: 4% - Ooh, a storm brushing by the Outer Banks and doing absolutely nothing! Gold star for originality, Cris. ::*Dolly: 43% - Kicked the shit out of South Padre but they came out of it reasonably well. ::*Ed: 6% - nuisance storm. Pissed on a couple people in North Texas but that's about it. ::*Fay: 34% - I think Fay's raised the sea level of the Gulf of Mexico about 8 feet. Pretty much every county in the state of Florida got at least two inches of rain from this thing. ::*Gustav: 87% - Gustav gave Cuba a shellacking and those floods in Haiti were really bad. Louisiana actually fared the best of the three. With 125 deaths and $10 billion in damage, I'd be stunned if Gustav isn't retired. ::*Hanna: 85% - Man, the sitation in Haiti has turned into an epic catastrophe. This is Haiti's worst hit since Jeanne. Gonaives is a hellhole, simply put. If 535 dead doesn't earn retirement, then the WMO needs to be lined up and shot. ::*Ike: 92% - Wow, what a storm! Very bad floods again again hit the Greater Antilles hard. It has just been a disasterous season for them. The situation in Texas is not much better right now. The destruction on the Bolivar Peninsula is epic. Ike effectively wiped four towns from the face of the Earth. This is turning out to be the storm of the season. It's been a long time since we've seen three (four if you count Fay) consecutive devastating storms like this. '04 didn't do it, '05 didn't do it. This is unbelievable. ::*Josephine: 2% - At least the Verdes got a nice breeze. ::*Kyle: 19% - Left Puerto Rico all soggy and knocked Nova Scotia around a bit. ::*Laura: 1% - Gave me something to look at for a couple of days. ::*Marco: 7% - Soaked Veracruz pretty good. Also, I have never seen a tropical cyclone with a windfield this small. It's incredible. Many supercell thunderstorms get larger than Marco. Could possibly be a record. ::*Nana: 0% - Dud of duds ::*Omar: 17% - Raised hell in the Caribbean, but its bark was worse than its bite. ::*Paloma: 53% - Dear God, what a storm! A fitting capstone to a helluva season. Luckily, the damage in Cuba was not as bad as was feared. Or the damage figure could just keep coming up. $2 billion? Wow. Either this storm destroyed entire towns or Cuban real estate is getting pricy. ::Assuming there are no winter surprises (Zeta, I'm talking to you), this is the complete list for 2008. -- [[User:SkyFury|''Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 04:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC) ::I think that Fay should be retired... if any of you lived in Orlando you'd understand the extent of the flooding that occured. Lakes that were 3 feet low a week ago are about 8 feet too high now and 4 landfalls... I cant' wait till the next one! 09:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC) :::Having just looked at photos of Florida after Fay, I've upped my figure for its retirement. I've heard quite little about the impact of it here (UK) though; think I've seen it mentioned in the news briefly twice. - Salak 03:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC) ::::I disagree. I don't think it should be retired and I definately don't think it will be retired. The flooding wasn't severe enough or widespread enough, nor did it cause enough damage. The fact that it wasn't a hurricane doesn't help. Tropical Storm Bret in 1993 killed 124 people in Venezuela in catastrophic floods (the exact same number as Ivan) and wasn't retired. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 16:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC) My own totally non-scientific predictions thus far: *Arthur: 0% *Bertha: 0% *Cristobal: 0% - Let's face it, all three had pretty negligible impact in terms of damage/fatalities, and these are what get storms retired. No sense in giving them a piddly 1 or 2% chance when it ain't gonna happen. *Dolly: 40% - Relatively high damage but nothing eye popping. *Edouard: 0% - As above. *Fay: 33% - Helluva wet storm, but I'm not willing to up the odds unless some striking damage figures come out. *Gustav: 100% - Based on damages to Cuba, large-scale evacuations and disruptions. Damage estimates over $20B, hard to imagine not retiring this one. *Hanna: 95% - Over 500 dead, she'd have to pull a Gordon not to be retired. *Ike: 100% - Damage estimates over $25B mean Ike is a shoe-in for retirement. *Josephine: 0% - Total dud. *Kyle: 10% - Only because Canada seems to enjoy retiring "their" hurricanes. *Laura: 0% - Just a fishie. *Marco: 0% - Not memorable beyond the confines of weather-wonks and trivia buffs. *Nana: 0% - Another total dud. *Omar: ?? - No direct deaths. Probably some damage involved but until figures are out I can't really give this one a particular number. Really what it all boils down to, for me, are the criteria upon which storms get retired. Sure, they may have broken a record or been a nuisance, but really these are not things that storms get retired for. To date, I'd not be surprised if no storms are retired - but with September looming and Gustav looking dangerous, I'm sure that sentiment will change. Albireo 16:28, 15 September 2008 (UTC) I'm new but heres mine perdiction so far: *Arthur: 0% - A little tiny storm that hit mexico and was brought to life by a pacific hurricane not happenin *Bertha: 1% - sure the long lived july storm but did nothing but died in iceland *Dolly: 42% Even though its an estimate its possible come on people *Edouard: 5% Face it this storm should have been retired back in 96 and I was 2 years old *Fay: 48% - If this name gets retired im runnin up the hills like allison *Gustav: 100% - Since we havent had an official cat 4 in a while this will be it for Gustav, estimate 20.0 billions *Hanna: 95% - 535 deaths If noel got retired last year this is the next name and if it isn't WMO is on crack *Ike: 100% - This thing just raped the shit out of Texas i mean OMG *Josephine: 0% - Turned around to myself turns outs shes a dud *Kyle: 16% - I don't know we all remember juan right *Laura: 1% - Yeah yeah the wmo will be stupid jackasses if they retire this name *Marco: 0% - well we might as well make fun of its short size right *Nana: 0% - wow just wow *Omar: 25% - I'm not placing any bets but it prop was a cat 4 right but regardless *Paloma: 35 - CHEERS this season broke the ultimate 2005 season for major canes each month but cuba screw again I excluded cristobal on the list because it hardly did anything Looks like this season already has another hurricane to my perdictions this season will be big. J.T 2:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC) *Arthur - 0% *Bertha - 0% *Cristobal - 1% *Dolly - 60% Historically would have been retired. Wait for damage estimates. *Edouard - 10% Unlikely. *Fay - 20% Fair amount of Caribbean flooding, but not much. *Gustav - 100% Really obvious. *Hanna - 85% Over 500 dead in Haiti. No one wants another Gordon, and Noel was retired last year for a lot less. Probably gone. *Ike - Can't say for certain right now, but the forecasts look nasty. If it follows the forecasts, 90+% *Josephine - 0% --- Let's be realistic here. *Arthur - 0% *Bertha - 0% *Cristobal - 0% *Dolly - 20% *Edouard - 0% *Fay - 30% *Gustav - 85% *Hanna - 70% (Haiti doesn't have a good track record for retirement, but I think the WMO has gotten smarter) *Ike - 100% (deaths in Haiti, damage to Cuba, damage to the U.S.; this one's a certainty) *Josephine - 0% *Kyle - 0% *Laura - 0% *Marco - 0% (storms aren't retired for being record-breaking) Bob rulz :I note that Ike managed to kill 47 or 48 in Haiti despite never getting very near...what's the total for hurricane dead in Haiti so far this year?It seems something in the geography or infrastructure there puts Haitians at particular risk.Do their nominations for retirement usually get honored?--L.E./ 19:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC) ::The last total I saw put the dead at over 1,000 from a month of storms but that ''may be an overestimate. I'm guessing it could still easily be at least 600. I'm not sure if Haiti even requests storms for retirement, but look up Gordon in 1994. Killed over 1,100 in Haiti yet wasn't retired. A travesty in my opinion. Bob rulz 01:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC) My Predictions: *Arthur - 0% *Bertha - 0% *Cristobal - 0% *Dolly - 40%: If the 1,200,000,000 damage prediction is correct, I could see Dolly being retired. *Edouard - 0% *Fay - 25%: Decent amount of flooding in Florida; made landfall in Florida 4 times. We'll see. *Gustav - 100%: I cannot see any reason why Gustav would not be retired. *Hanna - 90%: I know, I know, Gordon wasn't retired, but with all the public backlash the WMO experienced from that, I can't see them making that mistake again. *Ike - 100%: Heavily damaged nearly all of Northeastern Texas, especially Galveston. Obvious candidate for retirement. *Josephine - 0% *Kyle - 0%: I live in Yarmouth where Kyle made landfall, and nothing happened. *Laura - 0% *Marco - 0%: Seeing as it's effects were like a particularly violent thunderstorm, I can't see any retirement. *Nana - 0% *Omar - 75% - May not have done tons of damage, but it did hit several French islands, and France is very liberal with dolling out retirements (see Klaus). France was the country that requested Noel last year too, and it hit the Windwards as a wave. There you go. |'C A I N E R'||''ninety-one| 19:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC) :Arthur - No. :Bertha - Bermuda has gone through much, much, much worse. :Cristobal - No. :Dolly - A very slight maybe - while damages are considerable, one billion is no longer as much as it used to be. :Edouard - No. :Fay - Wasn't a great storm, but there's not much there to support retirement. :Gustav - Yes. Definitely yes. The US is definitely going to submit a 15 billion dollar name for retirement, and the WMO will definitely retire it. :Hanna - Probable, but Haiti doesn't much like (or whatever) to recommend storms for retirement, else there would be plenty more off-limits names in the Atlantic. If it was anywhere else, it would most likely be a lock. :Ike - The damage estimates are really, really high, and the damage pictures are really, really nasty. (That's a yes, in case you were wondering.) :Josephine - No. :Kyle - The Canadians don't get much up there, but then again, this wasn't bad even by their standards. :Laura - Considering it didn't actually do anything, no. :Marco - It's the smallest cyclone ever - as would be expected, it won't be retired. :Nana - Barely tropical, not even close to damaging. :Omar - This storm is technically officially a category 4 (wasn't even a "may" about it), but Wikipedia won't actually update it until that intensity is actually listed on an advisory, so you'll have to wait for the TCR to get that information updated. Fortunately, Omar mostly missed land, so it didn't do that much damage. :Paloma - Cuba damage wasn't awful, though it was very significant. I think Cuba may just decide to throw Paloma in the mix because of the added damages it caused. However, whether or not it will actually be retired probably depends on whether or not the damages on Little Cayman and Cayman Brac are as horrifying as they might be. I would say that Paloma is a complete toss-up - as more information comes in, we'll know better what the chances of retirement are. Squarethecircle 14:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC) Squarethecircle 20:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC) For the record (no pun intended), there have never been three consecutive retirees (nor three consecutive Hall of Famers if you like my system better) in the history of ever. '''G'ustav, H'anna and '''I'ke have a really good chance of doing it this year...and for all intents and purposes it should happen. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 05:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC) :I suppose Paloma's chances will be determined by the number of deaths in Cuba?--L.E./ 22:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC) ::A number which fortunately appears to be low. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 05:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC) :When reading the NHC's season summary the retirement of Gustav can be doubted because the lack of victims (the don't know how many direct and indirec killed persons but most of the are on Haiti and they still can't distinguish wether it was Fay or Hanna. Perhaps the damage was big enough, only it seems that the Wikipedia article is citing a much to high damage (8 bill. vs. 4,3 bill.) -- 19:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC) ::I got the average for this section, rounded to one decimal place (excluding some that are not put in percentages). *Arthur: 3.2% *Bertha: 3.4% *Cristobal: 1.5% *Dolly: 43.3% *Edouard: 4.8% *Fay: 37.7% *Gustav: 89.1% *Hanna: 81.3% *Ike: 98% *Josephine: 0.3% *Kyle: 9.2% *Laura: 0.5% *Marco: 1.5% *Nana: 0% *Omar: 39% *Paloma: 46% -- 01:56, 27 December 2008 (UTC) Cleaning up the clutter I've just archived the August discussion (excluding active storms) and Fay to their own archive pages; apologies if I wasn't supposed to do that. The page was just getting way too cluttered for me. Probably want to give Gustav its archive page soon, too. Thoughts?--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 20:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC) :Agreed. I just archived some old July discussion last week. I would keep Gustav up for at least another week as aftermath reports come in. HPC is still issuing advisories on inland flood threats from the remnants of Gustav. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 16:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC) ::How about partially archiving and leaving the last two or three parts of it? Do we really still need the sub-section about Gustav-as-an-invest? --Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 18:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC) :::Well just for the sake of keeping everything together and we don't have to keep it up much longer. I'd say by the time Ike is approaching landfall on the Gulf Coast (and the associated storm surge of posts come in) we should move Gus to a new home. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 06:10, 7 September 2008 (UTC) ::::Isn't it Hanna's turn now?--L.E./ 19:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC) :::::Yup. Think the remnants passed us here in the UK the other night. - Salak 11:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC) ::::::Archived Ike too, given that it went away a good while ago. --Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 00:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC) Archived the first few weeks of September; keeping week 4 (and Laura) open for now in case something develops out of those AoIs.--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 16:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC) :I think it's now the rest of September's turn. Storm's Eye 21:24, 4 October 2008 (UTC) ::Hold Laura for another day or two... its remnants are passing over us here in the UK at the moment. - Salak 01:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC) :::It's been another day or five, so as far as Laura goes, Off with 'r head!--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 16:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC) ::::I archived October posts and Omar, since it's already November, so if there's someone think that I shouldn't, apologies for that. :) Storm's Eye 02:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC) Archived the november stuff, since none of it is ongoing, and it's now December. Paloma got its own little page, the rest is under November. --Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 23:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC) What are the Storm Floaters? I see that there are currently 3 GOES satellites active and http://kd4dcy.net/blog/?p=425 explains "The GOES satellite has one visible-light imaging system that is kept in reserve for tropical storm situations. That camera is kept zoomed and focused on the current tropical system of interest" So how are so many floaters listed on http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/satellite.shtml and http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/floaters.html? 14:23, 7 September 2008 (UTC) :I assume the camera can refocus to a given coordinate within just a few minutes or even seconds. It's not that each image is taken exactly simultaneously, just within the same 15 minute period. Those images can be put through a myriad of spectrums which you see in the variety of IRs (which have been fantastically expanded). I don't know this for certain, it's just what I assume is going on. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 17:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC) The Saffir-Simpson Scale Seems to me the question has to be raised, but in the wake of Ike and the number of "Let's not run, it's only category 2"...should the scale be revised? It's useful enough, but when it becomes a pretext to ignore potentially devastating storms that happens to have somewhat weaker wind field, it's dangerous. Ike has made the point, for those who still missed it, that category and destructive potential were two, very, very different things (Katrina, for that matter - C-3 at landfall, after all)--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 03:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC) :Problem is, what additional objective and measurable data do you want to add into the criteria? 04:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC) ::I agree, the SSHS is only useful for estimating possible wind damage, not surge or rain flooding damage. It would be useful if it said "surge of a cat. 5", etc. One should look at more than the wind and be more educated before deciding whether to evacuate. 2007Astro'sHurricane 17:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC) The SSHS is fairly analogous to the Richter Scale when talking about earthquakes. The Richter Scale is good for measuring raw seismic energy, just as the SSHS is good for measuring the raw intensity of a hurricane. While it and related scientific scales are still used within the scientific community to discuss the raw power of an earthquake, it's use by public agencies has diminished. The USGS favors the Modified Mercalli scale, which is a somewhat more subjective scale that is intended to measure the effect of an earthquake, not just its power. A similar scale for measuring the effect of a hurricane would be highly useful for governmental agencies, especially in issuing warnings to the public, as such a scale would be a better indicator of how damaging a storm will be, not just how intense. The problem the IP (4.154.0.95) brings up before is a valid one, but one that can be addressed. As has been pointed out, intensity and wind speed are only one facet of a hurricane's destructive potential. Other factors, such as inland flooding from rain and, more particularly, storm surge are important - in fact, storm surge is usually the most dangerous element of a tropical cyclone. It should not be too hard to develop a relatively good system of forecasting a storm's damage potential based on key factors such as intensity, size, forward speed and the like. A major weakness is the subjective nature in talking about "potential damage", but subjectivity need not be a major issue. The MM scale in earthquakes is measured in subjective terms, such as how hard it is to stand, how much things wobble, what sorts of structures are damaged. These are the things that truly interest the general public, rather than objective measures such as wind speed and pressure. Something like the following could be made up as a subjective scale for tropical cyclones: Okay, so that was longer than I thought it would be :) Anyway, that's just an off the cuff example - but really I see no reason that a "subjective" scale cannot be developed that measures the predicted damage a storm will do, not just it's intensity. Might get people to take storms more seriously. Albireo 20:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC) :Just so you know, '04s Matthew and '05s Gert had exactly the same wind speed at peak intensity (40 knots) and there was little appreciable difference in their effects. The root of the problem here is that every storm is different. The damage never depends solely on wind speed. The wind speed, pressure gradient (the pressure difference between the low of the storm and the pressure of the surrounding environment), the size of the storm (as was the case with Ike), and the amount of diffluence in the atmosphere to fuel the rainstorms. Rain is an incredibly powerful killer. Water kills more people than any other entitiy (apart from time). It is very difficult to predict how much rain a storm will drop, because that depends on a lot of different things. The damage also hangs a lot on the location of landfall and the terrain. Foreward speed, too. So there really isn't a way you can categorize these systems until after they happen (like tornadoes). Nothing is cut and dry and no matter what scale you set up, there will still be holes where people think they're safe and they're not. That's why basically all storms making landfall need to be watched very carefully. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 04:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC) ::I do know, that's why I put them both up there in spite of having different effects :) I think that was the whole point, was to demonstrate that a storm's destructive potential has to do with a lot more than windspeed. While it is true there is no way to accurately forecast how much damage a storm can do, I believe there is a lot of benefit to the notion of placing anticipated damages on a numeric scale. How many folks refused to leave the Galveston area because Ike was "just a cat 2" storm? Let's face it: people's focus immediately zeros in on things like storm categories, and they tend not to notice the dire warnings later on in the forecast. Most people don't have the attention span to read a full forecast, so some kind of attention-grabbing system of saying "Forget the windspeed, this one is going to kick your ass" would do a lot of good in getting people to pack up and get the hell out. Albireo 15:42, 18 September 2008 (UTC) :::I get the concepet, trying to create a scale not based solely on wind speed, I'm just saying that's very difficult. Yes there are ways we can generally judge the destructive potential of one storm as opposed to another of the same Saffir-Simpson category but such a scale is very subjective and in meteorology, you do best you can to stay objective. The closest we could come to producing an objective scale like that is taking the wind speed, pressure gradient, wind radii, diffluence and general region of estimated landfall together to create a kind of "Combined Effects Severity Scale" for tropical cyclones, Classes I-V or I-VII or something and that's a lot of work getting all that data just to produce a classification for the storm. If there's a way to make something like that practical, I'm all for it, but I just don't think it really makes much sense right now. On top of that, what are we accomplishing? Confusing the public? The problem of people underestimating the power of these storms will never go away, IMO. Katrina was a Category 5 hurricane with 175 mph sustained winds barrelling for New Orleans and still thousands were in no hurry to leave. "We made it through all the storms in the past, why not again? The Gov't will protect us and give us what we need." Despite seeing recent disasters like Andrew, Charley and Ivan on the news, it's still hard for people to comprehend such a destructive force. They just don't want to believe the storm will be that bad. It's not a problem so much with the classification system as it is a problem with human psychology. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 05:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC) ::::I think this is sort of the wrong approach. It's not about the Total Energy (TE), it's about the Total Destructive Energy (TDE). There are three factors which cause almost all of the damage in a tropical cyclone: Storm surge, winds, and torrential rain floods, in order from most to least damaging. Most of the other effects of a storm are negligible. The factors involved are (excluding land structure so as to allow free comparison of oceanic storm intensity) forward speed (all three), winds (surge and winds), and size (surge and rain floods). Now, there is a double weighting process: Weight the causal three for how much of the impacting three each accounts for, then weight the impacting three for how much damage they cause. Since these are also the three factors most often measured in the historical database, past storms can easily be assigned a rating. However, you then need a TLDE (Total Landfall Destructive Energy) component - different weightings are necessary depending on the coastal geography. Furthermore, a more... sort of advanced kind of description should be created for the categories. What I mean by this, is that, instead of letting the people watch videos of what happened before, or hear descriptions, it would be a lot better to show virtual explanations - a house very similar to their own getting obliterated by a hurricane that could be coming their way is a lot more effective than a house that they know is different, in a storm they know wasn't the same as the one bearing down on them. Of course, not everyone has a computer, but almost everyone has a TV. Squarethecircle 17:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC) :::::First off, inland flooding killed more than half of those who lost their lives in tropical cyclones between 1970 and 1999. Storm surge was in about the 20% range. I wrote my senior paper on this very thing. The most lethal misconception about tropical cyclones is that effects inland won't be as bad as on the coast. And don't forget about tornadoes. Tornadoes are a very serious threat from a landfalling hurricane. Carla produced an F4 tornado that killed like 20 people and destroyed a small town. These things are very complicated and you can't narrow it down that far. It also needs to be emphasized that we can only give the destructive potential of a storm. You're also missing the point on the way people think. People don't automatically assume an event is going to be such a horrible catastrophe and entire towns will be left in ruins. People can't wrap their minds around that. They can't bring themselves to believe that something like that might be happening. On 9/11, for the longest time people thought it was just a tragic accident despite the fact that the sky was clear and the weather was perfect. They didn't just up and say it was the worst act of violence in modern times outside theatres of war. No matter what scale you throw out there, there are still going to be hundreds, even thousands who think the storm won't be that bad. You can show video, animation, describe all the horrors of the past and many will still think you're being melodramatic. Yes, you say a storm headed for Texas has 110 mph winds and then show what 110 mph winds would do to a normal house...that will indeed raise some eyebrows but that won't give people the whole story. Minimizing human loss of life comes down to swift response of local officials and public awareness of where they live and what kind of effects they'll be looking at. It should be common sense that if you have a hurricane with 175 mph sustained winds coming at you that leaving might be a good idea. Especially if all the roads to the beach go uphill. That's not a scale problem, that's an education problem. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 05:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC) ::::::What about a storm's IKE (Integrated Kinetic Energy)? Ike had a really high IKE, and while in the Gulf I think it peaked higher or about as high as Katrina and Rita. As a cat. 2, Ike could have been more destructive than Katrina as a cat. 5. 2007Astro'sHurricane 23:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC) Of course inland flooding kills does significant damage - but not in the US. Think about it - people in some parts of Cuba, Hispaniola, etc. can't really evacuate per se and can't get that kind of information. Thus, they "don't count" - since this bit unfortunately wouldn't be able to help them, their information will just bias the data in the wrong direction - and given the number of deaths in those regions, that bias is extraordinary. Removing that section of the numbers puts inland flooding a fair amount behind the others (though some storms, like Allison, cause so much flooding that the damage is significant - i.e., inland flooding is more of a variant in terms of damage caused than storm surge and flooding). Local officials can't handle that kind of work. Many of the small towns where damage is often the worst (since big cities don't typically line the shores, except for the Miami area) don't have enough people to handle it - their budget isn't big enough. Asking them to deal with a natural disaster is like asking Luxembourg to prevent Massive Retaliation (exaggeration) - they will not be able to do anything. The bigger problem is, no one can do that kind of work. You're asking for some sort of miracle for every vulnerable port town in the United States. So - do you have a reasonable idea? Squarethecircle 03:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC) :First, I don't understand how you can belittle inland flooding. Allison left downtown Houston looking much like New Orleans after Katrina. $5.5 billion final figure. Allison killed more people in the US (55) than Hugo (35), Isabel (50), Charley (30) or Ivan (54). Hurricane Agnes, 1972 made landfall in Florida with 75 mph winds (barely a hurricane) and caused record breaking floods across the entire eastern half of the country that killed 122. It would be 33 years before the US saw more people die in a hurricane. Hurricane Floyd, killed about 80 in catastrophic floods in the mid-Atlantic region. Ditto with Isabel. Diane in 1955 killed over 100 people in horrific floods in the mid-Atlantic states. Also of note, the Okeechobee Hurricane of 1928 that killed over 4,000 Floridians wouldn't have been an eighth as bad had torrential rain not caused the dykes holding back Lake Okeechobee to burst. It doesn't happen all the time, but it has happened many, many times in the recent past. Storm surge is just as variant. Larger and long-track storms will likely have a larger storm surge than others. Location is also key. Note that Andrew's storm surge did almost nothing, venting all 17 feet of it onto uninhabited Elliott Key. Most of Andrew's damage was wind related (very unusual for a destructive hurricane, but it happened). :Second, I'm not asking local officials for the moon, just to do for their people like Galveston County and Texas officials did for Ike and personal awareness is even more important than that. I doubt many of those affected even attached any significance to the "Category 2" designation, they just knew it was a big hurricane coming at them. You're not going to get everybody in danger to leave, it's just not going to happen (nor will it ever IMO). We just have to find a way to convince as many people as we can that when a big storm is coming, staying would be tantamount to suicide. There are so many factors that come into play when you try to determine the destructive potential of one storm over another. That's why I think any scale that would give a better idea of a storm's destructive potential than SSHS would be too complex to be practical...at this point. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 23:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC) Any Reason Why? Since 2001 on wiki there are 2 - 3 Main Discussion articles on a hurricane season. I dont know who changed it or why but the articles that date 2000 and before are more neat and have each hurricane/Storm with its own article. List of storms in the 2001 Atlantic hurricane season, and 2001 Atlantic hurricane season are almsot the same and this has gone on to 2007. Knowledgekid87 10:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC) :If I remember correctly, 2005 is to blame for that. People realized that with very seasons of 15, 20, 30 depressions and storms, you rapidly got to the point where articles were clunky and had far too much material. Hence the separation. I could be wrong, though.--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 17:51, 29 September 2008 (UTC ::Yeah I understand how 2005 could be in that format with so much to talk about but not the others. The 2006 Atlantic hurricane season article is in that format with just 10 storms. Oh well anyways hopefully a veteran editor will come along and clean it up. Based on the storms so far in my opinion there is no need for the 2008 Atlantic hurricane season to have a branch out "List of storms in the 2008 Atlantic hurricane season" type article. Knowledgekid87 16:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC) :::For 2006, yeah, I can see, but for seasons of 15, 20 storms it's already unwieldy enough, and a summary of the season works better than a list of storms for the main article.--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 20:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC) ::::I agree, keep in mind though in most cases the storms themselves have their own articles so alot of info is just rewritten again. Knowledgekid87 23:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC) Replacement names for possible retirement candidates Well, it looks like we have quite a few possible retirement candidates for this hurricane season. Here is a list that I compiled of possible replacement names that I like, with my favorites highlighted in bold. '''Female D names *DAISY *DANA *'DAPHNE' *DARLA *DAWN *DEANNA *DELIA *DELPHINA *DENISE *DESIREE *DINAH *DIONNE *DIXIE *DOMINIQUE *DORIS *DOROTHY *DOT Female F names *FABIANNA *FEDORA *FELISHA *FERN *'FIORENZA' *FRANCESCA *FRANCINE Male G names *GABE *GARFIELD *GARRETT *GARTH *GARY *GENE *GEOFF *GERALD *GERALDO *GERARD *GERMAN *GIANMARCO *'GIOVANNI' *GLENN *GODDARD *GRAHAM *GRIFFIN Female H names *HAILEY *HARRIET *HEIDI *HELENA *HELEN *'HELGA' *HOLLY Male I names *'IAN' *IMMANUEL *INNOCENTE *IOAN *IRVING *IZZY Does anyone have any names that they like to add to these lists? 22:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC) :Hilda is a BIG no no. Already used. Already retired. Igor is Ivan's replacement. George, if you ask me, is unusable due to Georges. *G names: Guy, Garcia, Geoffrey *I names: Iggy, Irving, Isaiah, Irv, Ingmar, Innes (likely not good due to Inez) 06:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC) ::Well, Frederic was replaced by Fabian, which was soon replaced by Fred. Thus, it is not unheard of for the WMO to use a variant of a previously retired name. Since Igor is already being used, my choice for Ike's replacement would then be Ian. 01:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC) :::I'd agree, but I forgot one detail: Hilda's in use in the EPac on the current lists. When you consider it was retired in the Atlantic, plus the fact that the name's in use in a different basin also advised by the NHC, the chances of Atl reuse are, essentially, zero. 09:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC) ::::First off, I don't believe Fay will be retired. Dolly is possible, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's not retired either, if only for the reason that there were far more significant storms this season. Try and not get silly with this. Common names are best. Other D-names: Dawn, Dinah, Dominique and Dot. There are lots of good 'G' names; I added Gabe, Gerard, German and Glenn. Running out of I-names; I added Irving (mentioned above), Innocente and Ioan (male spelling). I also removed some of the crazier names and unusable names (ones in use in ATL or EPAC, such as Igor and Gil, or retired names) to save space. I'll go with Denise, Graham, Helen and Ian. But there are some other good names up there. Also, no retired name is retired permanently. The rule is that a name is not used for 30 years after its retirement. 2009 (when the name Fred is targeted for use) will see the 30th anniversary of Frederic's landfall. I was a little surprised that they used it this soon however as there are other male 'F' names that could've been used, such as Fritz, Franz and Fernando (which replaced Felix last year...I still refuse to acknowledge the French form because it's mindnumbingly stupid, and the French irritate me to no end). -- [[User:SkyFury|''Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 19:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC) :::::Dude, have you BEEN to France? They're actually very nice and considerate people. Squarethecircle 22:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC) :::::Helen is extremely unlikely given that Helene is already on the 2006-2012 list. 02:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC) When will the NHC switch to a "continuous" naming system like the West Pacific? It's much more useful. Bob rulz 21:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC) :I don't believe they use names in the Atlantic that aren't either English, French, or Spanish. Some names appear to be retired indefinitely, according to Wikipedia. The only re-used retired names so far were decades ago and were partially mistakes. By the way Sky, Dorian is a unisex name. Also, you may not like the French, but...c'est la vie. Just a side note: Innocente would not be a good name for a hurricane because how would you retire an "innocent" name? I've also never heard of "Immanuel" except as "Emmanuel". 2007Astro'sHurricane 01:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC) ::So, is there any problem with Italian names? It would be interesting to have a few of them, which is why I chose Fiorenza and Giovanni. 02:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC) Astro, that's one of many reasons why I hated the choice of 'Dorian' over the slew of normal names that could've been chosen (Derek, Darren, Daryl...). Square, yes I have been to France (June, 2001) and it's a great place, I had a lot of fun. I don't have a problem with the people per se, I have a problem with their extremely stuck up government. It always has to be them; they have to go first. They have to have the organization that controls one thing or another. They have to have the last word on whatever they want. They're like the snotty third grader that pitches a fit everytime you don't involve them in something. Also, I don't know if you noticed, but there's a lot of underhanded gouging of tourists over there. For example, there are no free refills in French restaurants, but sometimes, when they see you're an American used to free refills, they'll take your glass, refill it an then charge you for it even though you didn't ask for a refill. We were a school group with French teachers, so it didn't happen to us but I've heard more than one story like that. -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 17:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC) :Also, in this list, I would take off German in the "G" names because I don't think Germany will like that name if it is Gustav's replacement. It might offend them. Hurricane Isamel of the 1995 Pacific hurricane season was replased by Israel, and the country of Israel didn't like the name, and neither will Germany if German is Gustav's replacement. Does anyone else out there agree on that name being taken off? Well? anyone out there agree on German being removed? Well? 05:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC) Could Gustav became a Cat5 I was reading this one dudes question on wikipedia and I wanted to ask you guys could it have become a cat 5 and it was also weird that they were no cat 5 this season since there has been one every season since 2003. J.T 4:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC) :Not 2006, peak category that year was Category 3. Yes, Gustav ''could' be upgraded to a Category 5 or very close to Category 5 (by that I mean 155mph). 23:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC) ::I don't think it's likely. The pressure was still pretty high (941 mb) and all indications are that it got no stronger than 135 kts, and the 130 kt figure is likely to stand. I think Ike may have surpassed it in terms of pressure, but Gustav will still likely be the season's strongest hurricane in terms of wind speed. -- [[User:SkyFury|''Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 19:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC) :::Actully the running best track has downgraded it to 125 knots which means its still a 4 Jason Rees 18:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC) Retirements at a glance, part 2 Well, since the previous section got quite large, I decided it is time to revisit the subject and start a new section, as the season is almost over. Here are my latest guesses: *Arthur - 4% - not severely damaging. *Bertha - 3% - strong, but once again not severely damaging. *Cristobal - 2% - forgettable, barely damaging at all. *Dolly - 60% - Damage estimate still remains at $1.52 billion several months after its landfall. *Edouard - 5% - Damage total unknown, but once again, probably not severe. *Fay - 25% - Current damage estimate is $180 million, which is significant (especially for a tropical storm), but nothing extremely severe (far short of $1 billion mark). *Gustav - 95% - Very severely damaging, I would be very surprised if it is not retired. *Hanna - 85% - Very deadly, although Gordon (which affected the same area) of 1994 wasn't retired, yet again, Jeanne of 2004 was retired. *Ike - 100% - Third most destructive named hurricane in U.S. history, pretty obvious candidate. *Josephine - 1% - just gave Cape Verde a little breeze and nothing else. *Kyle - 5% - While not severely damaging, Canada got Juan of 2003 retired. However, Kyle was less damaging than Juan, so I don't think it is very likely Kyle will be retired. *Laura - 1% - Fishspinner while tropical. *Marco - 5% - Damage unknown, but probably not severe. *Nana - 0% - Total fishspinner. *Omar - 15% - Still waiting for damage total. Probably more damaging than Edouard and Marco, but we will have to see whether the damage is severe enough for retirement. This is exactly what we have been doing with T.S. Erin last year. *Paloma (tentative) - 40% 55% - A fairly strong hurricane that caused $1.4 billion in damage in Cuba. 02:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC) Anyone have other guesses? 15:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC) :Mine: :*Certain (99.99%): Gustav and Ike. Not retiring either of these would run against everything retirement stands for. US will nominate, and WMO will retire. :*Probable (90%): Hanna. Only "mostly" because of the unwritten Haiti Rule. :*Possible (40%): Dolly. Impressive, but lost in the shadows of the G-H-I (arguably FGHI) sequence. May slip through the crack between Gustav and Ike. :*Possible (40%): Kyle. We Canucks rarely get the chance to nominate anything, so we may try our hand at it there. :*Hopeful (25%): Fay. Weak, but retirement has more to do with name-defining storms (ie, storms that people would automatically think of when the name surfaced again) than with pure strength and damage alone, in theory, and I think Fay's antics have made Fay of 2008 far more defining of the name "Fay" than Dolly of 2008 of the name "Dolly". Also, I will be eternally grateful to the WMO if they do retire our little Joker. :*Not happening (0.01%): Everyone else. :That's about all I can say so far--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 18:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC) :Mine:Gustav and Ike are yes, guranteed retirement, and I can say that Dolly, Fay, Hanna, and Paloma have a ''fair chance of retirement. I don't think Omar will be retired. The damage reports I have found don't indicate damage was catastrophic at all in the islands. Fay probrably has a good chance of retirement because the damage reports I've found show it caused more than 180 million in damage. Hundreds of homes in Florida and the southeast were damaged or destroyed from Fay. Dolly caused 1 and a half billion dollars in damage, and I think that was accurate because it struck months ago , and the 1.5 billion in damage isn't changed, if it was lower, it probrably would have been found out earlier than now. Hanna has a fair chance, but because all of it's deaths were confined to the poor country of Haiti, it may also not be retired. Gordon of 1994 caused more than twice it's death toll, but it wasn't retired. Jeanne of 2004 was, but it caused severe damage in the U.S. as well, which was probrably the main reason for it's retirement; it's Haiti toll had little to do with it. Paloma caused 1.4 billion in damage to Cuba, but the storm's damage on the Caymans isn't known yet, just as Fay's total damage isn't known yet. Here is a chart of the storms I think will be retired: Any others have guesses about retirement? 11:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC) :On Hanna, I think the combination of the high death count over Haiti (500+, the fact that it has a Stateside death count (7) will get it. Particularly as Noel got the boot for a LOT less last year. --Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 02:08, 11 December 2008 (UTC) Well, regarding Noel, that storm caused damage in several areas, like Cuba, Hispaniola, the bahamas and Canada, and I think that it was retired for that, because it had widespread impacts, Like Dean that year as well; Other than Haiti and the US, Hanna didn't do much. Gordon of 94 caused almost all of it's impact in Haiti and because of it, wasn't retired. Same could be with Hanna as well. 21:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC) :The reason why Gordon wasn't retired after 1994 is because Haiti didn't request the name to be retired. The WMO has never turned down any request. 02:18, 18 December 2008 (UTC) If Haiti didn't request Gordon, then they shouldn't request Hanna either, because Hanna didn't even cause half of Gordon's impact. But we'll wait about that. 21:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC) Also, Paloma's damage is now 2 billion, 600 million in the Caymans. Could have a better chance of retirement now. 21:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC) :In 2005, there were (subjectively) six storms with a 50% chance or greater of being retired: Dennis, Emily, Katrina, Rita, Stan and Wilma (Gamma came close after killing 30 people in Honduras). Of those, only Emily was not retired. However, that season saw 28 storms. This year, there "only" 16 (*cough*17*cough*) and we have arguably five at 50% or greater: Dolly (barely), Gustav, Hanna, Ike and Paloma (I exclude Fay since tropical storms are heavily discriminated against). 5 out of 16 versus 6 out of 28. That means in 2005, just over one seventh (1/7=4/28) of the storms caused enough destruction to earn at least a 50% chance of retirement. In 2008, that ratio was nearly an unbelievable one third (1/3=5/15). You don't have to be a math whiz to see how incredible that is. Almost a third of the storms this season were bad enough to merit serious discussion on retirement. That's scary. -- [[User:SkyFury|''Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 08:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC) Well, we can't be certain about this. I know Gustav and Ike will be retired, and Dolly, Fay, Hanna, and Paloma ''could be retired. We aren't sure about Fay because the official damage report hasn't been released. With Dolly, the 1.5 billion in damage was most likely accurate because it struck many months ago, and it still hasn't been changed. Hanna is possible, although Gordon of 1994 wasn't retired, and it caused more than twice the death toll of Hanna. Paloma will probrably be a retired name, but we'll wait on it. Omar is another canidate, but I don't think it will get retired, unless if France requests it. They requested Noel of last year and Klaus of 1990 to be retired, and Omar affected many French territories, some severely, like Dominica, Martinique, and Antigua and Barbuda. We'll leave that up to them to decide, since I personally don't find Omar a likely canidate. And with 2005, Emily wasn't retired because no one requested it. It only caused half a billion in damage and only 16 deaths, which is rather low for a cat 5. This year will have 2-6 retired names (in my perspective). It should at least tie 2005 for the highest number, or barely exeed it. 12:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC) :Let's not focus too much on Gordon though. Keep in mind that Haiti in 1994-95 was in the middle of some rather major (ie, way worse than now) political upheavals. Asking for hurricane names to be retired probably wasn't on anybody's mind.--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin 21:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC) Well, if that was the case, then Hanna is a coin toss of yes or no. I personally think it should be retired, but that's the WMO's decision. Omar's damage reports are coming out, but damage remains light. It could be retired should France request it; they requested Noel and Klaus, and could also request Omar. Oh, and by the way, in 05, there were 5 out of 28 storms that were retired. That means that only about 18% of the storms that year were retired. Even 07 had a bigger ratio - 3 out of 15 - 20% of the names. In 08, 7 out of the 16 storms have a chance for retirement. That means 47% of the storms this year could be retired. That means this list will have more retired names than any other one list on record. List 4 has the current record, with 12 retired names, and this list had 7 retired names so far. It could go all the way up to 14 after this next meeting. Regardless, are there any others out there with retirement guesses or not? 17:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC) :I only mentioned Emily because I think it broke the 50% mark, not because I thought it should've been retired. My point was that a startlingly great percentage of the storms this year were significantly destructive regardless of intensity. Currently, out of seasons with at least 10 storms since traditional naming began in 1953, 1955 appears to have had the greatest percentage of retirees: 33.3 (4/12). It's going to be tough for 2008 to challenge that. Even if Dolly, Gustav, Hanna, Ike and Paloma are all retired, the percentage would be 31.2. After 1955 comes 1954 and 1985 (tied at 27.2), 2004 (26.6), 1964 (25), and 1996 (23). And duely note that in 1955, Hurricane Hilda, which killed 300 people across the Caribbean, is not one of the four that was retired (don't ask me why, NHC handled retirement back then and was somewhat US centric I guess). With Hilda included, 1955's percentage jumps to 41.6! That's a record I hope will never be broken. -- [[User:SkyFury|''Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 23:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC) Well, Regardless, it wasn't retired. The reason why Hilda wasn't retired after 1955 was because (I think) it only caused 300,000 dollars in damage (1955 USD). It killed 300, but wasn't retired because damage wasn't severe. This was the case with Olga of last year as well. Caused 40 deaths, but only 45 million in damage. Had Olga been retired, 2007 would have the 2nd highest # of retired names after any season (tied with 55, 95, and 04). Also, Olga would be the first off-season storm to be retired in the Atlantic Basin. But back to 2008, as I said, there are 2-7 canidates for retirement. They are Dolly, Fay, Gustav (guranteed), Hanna, Ike (guranteed), Omar, and Paloma. Does anyone else have retirement guesses, like you, Sky (if you hadn't guessed yet). 23:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC) :I hope you aren't condoning that as an excuse. All storms that kill 300+ people should have their names retired. Hilda was a Category 3, Olga was a tropical storm and did that damage laregly because of poor emergency management (please keep any Katrina comparisons to yourself, this is very different). -- [[User:SkyFury|Sky]][[User talk:SkyFury|Fury]] 22:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC) ::Using all data from this section (Part 2), the chances of all storms being retired are 25.5%. Ike has the highest chance, 99.995% (well, you can consider that as 100%), and Nana has the lowest chance, 0.005% (0%). 02:09, 27 December 2008 (UTC) Otherwise, I guess the reason why Hilda wasn't retired was because back then, retirement wasn't so strict. Juan of 1985 did 1.5 billion in damage, and it wasn't retired. Beryl in 1982 killed 115 in the Cape Verde Islands, and wasn't retired. Today, retirement has gotten more strict, and we aren't exactly sure which ones will or will not be retired. This year should have at least 2 retired names (Gustav and Ike), although we could possibly have as much as 7 names retired. The bottom line is, we won't know for sure until they announce it. 15:15, 27 December 2008 (UTC) Hi I'm New here, and I love tracking the tropics! Here is my take on the retirement this year: *Arthur: 2%- A minor off-season storm that will not be retired. *Bertha: 6%- Sure, it broke a lot of records, but, so what? When it comes to its' total impact: fatalities, damages, etc., it barely did a thing but make rough seas for some fish. *Cristobal: 5%- I'm only giving it five percent only because it slightly impacted land, but it is not going to happen! *Dolly: 70%- OK, maybe that # is a bit high, but I think it will be retired, due to it's many millions+ dollars in damages. *Edouard: 8%- Again, not going to happen. Only eight percent because it was a strong TS that did affect land a tiny bit. *Fay: 78%- Ahhhhh, Florida's Red Spot for a week in August. This one was major trouble, and I think it is going to join Allison in the TS retirement list. *Gustav: 100%- This may have been the strongest storm of the season. It caused lots of trouble and it will be retired. If it is not, I don't know what has gotten into the WMO system. *Hanna: 86%- Tormented Haiti killing hundreds. Most likely ready to join the retired list. *Ike: 150%- DUH!!!! *Josephine: 0%- I don't know. Maybe Cape Verde will ask for retirement because it made it windy there!?!? *Kyle: 5%- Ummm, well, this storm did not to much, but I am hearing theories that it may be retired just because Canada feels like it. Although, the precursor to Kyle, Invest 93L, caused major problems for Puerto Rico and the eastern Caribbean. *Laura: 0%- Yeah, this one lasted up in the North Atlantic for like 5-6 advisories, did not do anything, was subtropical half the time, and did not affect ANYONE as a named system. *Marco: 6%- Again who cares about records. This storm was a like a mere thunderstorm. Six percent only because it drop a fair amount of rain. *Nana: 0%- Nothing notable about Nana, except that it spawned off a tiny little invest, the same size as Marco. *Omar: 52%- Chances are more against Omar leaving the list for 2014, but it did make things windy and rainy in the Caribbean, and it was a Category 4. In short, though it could have been much worse. *Paloma: 70%- Whacked Cuba and the Camyans and only added to those places' damages from Gustav and Ike. Chances are in favor of being booted from the naming list. SO HERE IS MY '''COMPLETE' REPLACEMENTS LIST, WITH THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF RETIREMENTS FROM THIS YEAR IN BOLD: *Aaron *Brenda *Cody *'Darlene' *Ethan *'Flo' *'Gary' *'Heidi' *'Ian' *Jaquelin *Ken *Lindsay *Marvin *Nadia *'Owen' *'Pheobe' *Robbie *Sarah *Travis *Violet *Warren I CAN LATER POST ALL THE POSSIBLE NAMES I FOUND!!! Thanks for reading!!!- 04:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC) My guesses? I only see them retiring 3 or 4. Definitely Ike and Gustav. Probably Hannah and/or Paloma. Other than that, probably not. --Patteroast 19:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC) I really don't see Fay or Omar being retired. While Fay was significantly damaging (especially for a tropical storm), it simply didn't do enough damage to warrant retirement; TS Allison was far more damaging. Omar, while strong, was not severely damaging either. 18:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC) :Well, FYI we aren't sure about Fay. It's official damage report hasn't been released yet, and it's official damage was probrably bigger than 180 million. Omar caused little damage, but did affect many French territories, and France has a tendency to retire names that aren't worth much (see Hurricane Klaus of 1990). 21:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)